11 comments:

Recently on a website with political cartoons I saw one with 4 television network logos and underneath them what the letters meant. NBC was "Nothing But Clinton", CBS was "Clinton Broadcasting System" and CNN was "Clinton News Network" (don't remember ABC). That cartoon annoyed me because when I watch CNN (admittedly mostly 360 and some Blitzer) there's a heck of a lot of Trump.Like Wednesday's 360.

Trump's visit to Mexico, his meeting with President Nieto, what each of them said, panel analysis and discussion of Trump's upcoming immigration speech in Phoenix was the entire first hour. In the first segment Jeff Zeleny had a minute and a half to report what Hillary Clinton said about Trump's visit. Otherwise the reporters reported on nothing but Trump, the panels discussed nothing but Trump. Most of the time on the bigger video box on the screen Trump's plane was shown (John Berman, "Trump will be leaving his plane shortly...") or his motorcade or the empty podium at the Phoenix venue. It was as if it was 1964 and that was the Beatles' plane.

Lavish and slavish coverage of Trump.Although Hayes also had a lot on Trump (including an amusing piece on how much Mexicans hate Trump and how they express it - so did Maddow), there was a segment devoted to Hillary (with an interview with Jennifer Granholm).

@ATA - thanks for the info on where Anderson was tonight. Also, I liked the news yesterday about the police dog named Anderson Cooper, he's a real cutie.

How can Anderson or any other journalist on CNN possibly be proud to work for the network under Jeff Zucker? CNN's embrace of Trump and the unethical hiring of Corey Lewandowski and the excessive presence of Trump's other surrogates are an abomination, not to mention CNN's unfair, mostly negative and fairly scant coverage of Hillary Clinton. Yes, no one's forcing me to watch, but I'm still totally disgusted at what's happened to CNN and its reporters in the age of Trump.

ABSOLUTELY CORRECT ARIES MOON. MY FEELINGS EXACTLY. I TRY VERY HARD NOT TO WATCH ANDERSON"PANDER" TO TRUMP SUPPORTERS ON HIS PANEL EVEN THOSE WITH CREDIBILITY LIKE DANA BASH ARE HARD TO TAKE, BECAUSE YOU KNOW IN THE END SHE'SGOING TO TURN A MINUS INTO A PLUS FOR TRUMP, AND A PLUS INTO A MINUS FOR HILLARY, AND IF IWERE PART OF THE HILLARY CAMP, THE MINUTE SHE WINS, AND SHE WILL WIN, I'D LET CNN'S JEFF ZUCKER KNOW THAT HILLARY WILL GIVE NO INTERVIEWS TO WOLF, ANDERSON, OR ANY JOURNALIST WHO NEGATIVELY COVERED HER CAMPAIGN. I KNOW THIS SOUNDS LIKE A TRUMP THEME, BUT IN HER CASE, IT ISTRUE. CNN NEEDS HER, MORE THAN SHE NEEDS THEM. SHE CAN GIVE INTERVIEWS TO THE PRINT MEDIA, ANDOTHER JOURNALISTS THAT COVERED HER FAIRLY, BUT CNN SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF ITSELF FOR ALL THE NEGATIVE PROMOS THAT HAVE BELITTLED THE CLINTON NAME AND FOUNDATION.ON A LIGHTER NOTE, KAYLEE ALWAYS REMINDED ME OF SOME ANIMAL, BUT I COULD NEVER QUITE DETERMINE WHAT KIND, AND TODAY, AFTER AC'S PANDERING TO HER, CLAIMING HOW TRUMP WAS "JUST USING DIPLOMACY WITH THE MEXICAN PRESIDENT," THE THOUGHT CAME FULL CIRCLE. (A RODENT, YES, A LARGE FURRY RODENT, LIKE A RAT.) IT MUST BE HER EYES, VERY ROUND AND BEADY LOOKING. ALL SHE HAS TO DO IS WIGGLE HER NOSE, AND YOU CAN IMAGINE THE WHISKERS SWAYING AS SHE SPEAKS HER INCOHERENT THOUGHTS. NEXT TIME ANDERSON CAN ENTICE HER WITH BITS OF CHEESE AND WATCH ASSHE NIBBLES THE PARCELS, AND THEN LOOKS AROUND TO SEE IF ANYONE IS WATCHING.

THE WAY CNN COVERED TRUMP'S IMMIGRATION SPEECH WAS DISGUSTING. THEY WERE ON HIS EVERY MOVEAND SHOWED THE MOTORCADE AS IT ARRIVED IN THE PHOENIX VENUE. THIS IS UNHEARD OF. CNN IS ACTINGAS THOUGH TRUMP WAS ALREADY PRESIDENT! WHO GIVES A "CRAP!"AND HOW THE PANEL ELABORATED HIS TEN STEP IMMIGRATION SPEECH....SHEER NONSENSE....AND SOMEONEON HIS TEAM SEEMS TO BE PLAYING WITH A FULL DECK. THEY CAN ACTUALLY COUNT TO 10. (WE ALREADYKNOW IT ISN'T HIM.)

@CAPPY, one of the things that has bothered me about Dana Bash's reporting lately is her tendency to try to 'advise' the Trump team on ways they could be attacking Hillary with one of her so-called 'scandals' instead of Trump fighting off another self-inflicted mess in the press. I watched her on Wolf's show once and she was listing the 'scandals' that Trump should push to get the focus back on her. I might be overreacting (there were lots of folks on Twitter who noticed the same thing about Bash) but I don't think it's her job to do that--AC tries to pull the same thing every now and then. Bash is a respected and credible reporter overall, but when she engages in things like this, I find it hard to trust some of her reporting.

You guys are starting to sound like Trump, what with Cappy suggesting Hillary shouldn't grant interviews to CNN once she wins (and I really hope she does). Yes, CNN, as well as Anderson and other respected journalists have been critical of Hillary and the Clinton Foundation, but that's part of their job. They have also been equally critical of Trump, so much so that many Republicans are convinced that CNN has an inherent anti-Trump, pro-Hillary biases (why do you think they refer to CNN as the Clinton News Network?). The fact that both sides see bias as far as their party or candidate is reported on CNN and by Anderson (among others) plainly shows that they're just doing their job, which means they're critical of both Hillary and Trump. By the way, Anderson has just been selected to moderate one of the 3 presidential debates, so he must be doing something good regardless of what you people think.

@11:0 AM: WHILE ANDERSON HAS DONE A GOOD JOB IN THE PAST, HE HAS NOT DONE A GOOD JOB COVERINGHILLARY. AGAIN PLEASE SOURCE YOUR INFO. GIVE THE DATE THAT HILLARY WAS TREATED IN A FAIR ANDBALANCED WAY, AND I DON'T MEAN CRITICAL WAY, I MEAN JUST THAT, FAIR AND BALANCED. NOTHING ABOUT HER SERVER, OR PRIVATE SERVER, OR HOW THE FBI DIDN'T VET HER ENOUGH AND SHOULD KEEP ONVETTING HER BECAUSE SHE JUST MIGHT WIN.....DUH.IF YOU READ OUR CRITICISM OF ANDERSON WE OFTEN TIED IT TO THE DIRECTION OF JEFF ZUCKER, WHO WOULD SOO LIKE TO BE HEAD OF OF FOX AND MAYBE NOW THAT AILES IS LOOKING AT AN INDICTMENT, FROMALL THE WOMEN HE "DIDN'T" HARASS, THEY CAN HIRE ZUCKER BECAUSE HE IS NOT FAIR OR BALANCED.MENTIONING HILLARY IS NOT PROMOTING HER. CNN NEVER PROMOTED OR FOR THAT MATTER EVEN REPORTEDON THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, IN A FAIR AND BALANCED MANNER. FOR EIGHT YEARS HE COULDN'T GET ANY LEGISLATION PASSED BECAUSE THE REPUBLICAN HOUSE MAJORITY WOULDN'T ALLOW HIM TO PROCEED.ARE YOU LIVING IN A BUBBLE OR JUST IN DENIAL???I DO REMEMBER ONE NEGATIVE COMMENT ANDERSON DID MAKE TO TRUMP: HE SAID AND I QUOTE:"THAT IS THE REASONING OF A NINE YEAR OLD." IT HAPPENED ONE TIME AND ONE TIME ONLY, BUT IN TRUMP'S CASE,HIS REASONING ABILITY, HAS NOT PROGRESSED FURTHER THAN A GRADE SCHOOL CHILD, ANYWAY.

Cappy, you're being typically selective: Anderson (and others at CNN) have been a lot more critical of Trump than you claim. Only yesterday Anderson played a clip of the incredible interview in which that pro-Trump African-American pastor is caught lying on his website about graduating from some university, and then took another brainwashed African-American Trump supporter to task by asking him if there was any vetting involved for the Trump surrogates. That idiot Trumpet immmediately whined that Anderson never questions the legitimacy of Clinton surrogates, which Anderson denied by saying that he would ask the same question should any pro-Clinton supporter be exposed the way that pastor did. The point I'm trying to make here is that this African-American Trump surrogate was convinced that Anderson (and in CNN in general) was biased against his candidate while giving a pass to Hillary, which is exactly the reverse of what some of the posters around here (including Cappy) believe. This is further proof that truth is in the eye of the beholder, and that for every Democrat who thinks that Anderson and CNN are anti-Obama and anti-Hillary, there's a Republican who's convinced that they're both mouthpiece of the DNC and are overly critical of Trump. The fact that you guys seem unable to acknowledge this and furthermore that you are convinced that there's a conspiracy at CNN to be highly critical of Obama and Clinton while being soft on Trump truly blows my mind.

Whenever she bats her overly made up eyes and starts in with her whiney voice I go to the drop down on CNN's website and email them something to the effect " Oh crap. There's Blond ambition again. Time to change the channel." And then I do.